4 ms·

>> Because it was verbally promised by different high ranking officials, that the NATO would NOT move further east. Not according to the Soviet foreign ministe

>> Because it was verbally promised by different high ranking officials, that the NATO would NOT move further east. Not according to the Soviet foreign minister at the time. He also explains why this conspiracy theory is nonsense: at the time when that verbal promise was allegedly given, no-one could even imagine that Warsaw Pact would cease to exist. According to him, NATO status of Warsaw Pact countries was not discussed with Western officials, not discussed within Warsaw Pact, and not within Communist Party circles in Moscow either. https://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/interview-with-eduard-shevardnadze-we-couldn-t-believe-that-the-warsaw-pact-could-be-dissolved-a-663595.html https://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/interview-with-e... Nor did you answer my question. Why do Russian apologists try to word this as NATO was somehow forced upon Eastern Europe instead of integration into international institutions being their own long-term goal?

hutzlibu 3y ago
It is not a conspiracy theory that german foreign minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher, assured "NATO will not expand to the east".
- chrysler 3y ago
  As Shevardnadze clarifies, all they talked about NATO was strictly in the context of German reunification and attempts to take quotes out of context are anarchronistic. What assurances did the USSR need if it had a large nuclear-equipped group of forces in Poland? And besides that, many years later, but months before former Warsaw Pact countries started official NATO negotiations, NATO and Russia signed a treaty that gave a green light. So one one side of the conspiracy theory, you have a handful of scraps arranged to look like something, and on the opposing side you have actual written agreements and recollections from key people directly involved in those events.
- ffgjgf1 3y ago
  > Hans-Dietrich Genscher And all present, past and future politicians in Germany, Poland, US end everywhere else are supposed to be permanently bound by what a former German foreign minister supposedly said before leaving office back in 1992. Makes perfect sense.
lisasays 3y ago
The matter is murky in the details, but it certainly isn't a "conspiracy theory". Not surprisingly -- different participants have different recollections of what was said, and in what context. As a counterpart to the above, we also have Baker's assurances, made to the Soviets at the time “neither the President nor I intend to extract any unilateral advantages from the processes that are taking place". And that the Americans understood that “not only for the Soviet Union but for other European countries as well it is important to have guarantees that if the United States keeps its presence in Germany within the framework of NATO, not an inch of NATO’s present military jurisdiction will spread in an eastern direction.” Which certainly sounds like verbal promises that "NATO would not move further east". There is also Gorbachev's famous assessment of the whole matter, after the fact: “It [NATO expansion] was definitely a violation of the spirit of the statements and assurances made to us in 1990". Not that these assurances had the status of signed treaties -- and not that any of this stuff in any way justifies, minimizes or "explain" the current conflict, which as we know has one aggressor and by this point is entirely one-sided. But the statements above are part of the historical record -- not some conspiracy theory, or the inventions of Russian apologists.
- chrysler 3y ago
  Soviet leadership, including Gorbachev himself, have explicitly denied that any assurances existed. Like Shevardnadze, he denied that they even talked about it with western counterparts. In his own words: "The topic of ‘NATO expansion’ was not discussed at all, and it wasn’t brought up in those years. … Another issue we brought up was discussed: making sure that NATO’s military structures would not advance and that additional armed forces would not be deployed on the territory of the then-GDR after German reunification. Baker’s statement was made in that context…" Nobody brought the alleged assurances up when former Warsaw Pact joined NATO either. This narrative didn't exist until mid-2000, by which time NATO enlargement had largely ended. The spirit that Gorbachev bitterly speaks about is his idea of "Common European Home" that did not come to fruition, as Eastern Europe didn't want to have anything to do with Russians after half a century of oppression and turned their backs as soon as they could choose their own path. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_European_Home https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_European_Home

hutzlibu 3y ago

It is not a conspiracy theory that german foreign minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher, assured "NATO will not expand to the east".

chrysler 3y ago
As Shevardnadze clarifies, all they talked about NATO was strictly in the context of German reunification and attempts to take quotes out of context are anarchronistic. What assurances did the USSR need if it had a large nuclear-equipped group of forces in Poland? And besides that, many years later, but months before former Warsaw Pact countries started official NATO negotiations, NATO and Russia signed a treaty that gave a green light. So one one side of the conspiracy theory, you have a handful of scraps arranged to look like something, and on the opposing side you have actual written agreements and recollections from key people directly involved in those events.
ffgjgf1 3y ago
> Hans-Dietrich Genscher And all present, past and future politicians in Germany, Poland, US end everywhere else are supposed to be permanently bound by what a former German foreign minister supposedly said before leaving office back in 1992. Makes perfect sense.

lisasays 3y ago

The matter is murky in the details, but it certainly isn't a "conspiracy theory". Not surprisingly -- different participants have different recollections of what was said, and in what context. As a counterpart to the above, we also have Baker's assurances, made to the Soviets at the time “neither the President nor I intend to extract any unilateral advantages from the processes that are taking place". And that the Americans understood that “not only for the Soviet Union but for other European countries as well it is important to have guarantees that if the United States keeps its presence in Germany within the framework of NATO, not an inch of NATO’s present military jurisdiction will spread in an eastern direction.” Which certainly sounds like verbal promises that "NATO would not move further east". There is also Gorbachev's famous assessment of the whole matter, after the fact: “It [NATO expansion] was definitely a violation of the spirit of the statements and assurances made to us in 1990". Not that these assurances had the status of signed treaties -- and not that any of this stuff in any way justifies, minimizes or "explain" the current conflict, which as we know has one aggressor and by this point is entirely one-sided. But the statements above are part of the historical record -- not some conspiracy theory, or the inventions of Russian apologists.

chrysler 3y ago
Soviet leadership, including Gorbachev himself, have explicitly denied that any assurances existed. Like Shevardnadze, he denied that they even talked about it with western counterparts. In his own words: "The topic of ‘NATO expansion’ was not discussed at all, and it wasn’t brought up in those years. … Another issue we brought up was discussed: making sure that NATO’s military structures would not advance and that additional armed forces would not be deployed on the territory of the then-GDR after German reunification. Baker’s statement was made in that context…" Nobody brought the alleged assurances up when former Warsaw Pact joined NATO either. This narrative didn't exist until mid-2000, by which time NATO enlargement had largely ended. The spirit that Gorbachev bitterly speaks about is his idea of "Common European Home" that did not come to fruition, as Eastern Europe didn't want to have anything to do with Russians after half a century of oppression and turned their backs as soon as they could choose their own path. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_European_Home https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_European_Home